Tftp server problem - Mandrake

This is a discussion on Tftp server problem - Mandrake ; hi Experts, I am facing some problem with tftp-server in Redhat linux Actually we used this tftp server for IOS image coping in to routers the problem is actually we installed tftp-server-0.40-1 package on my Redhat linux server and edited ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Tftp server problem

  1. Tftp server problem

    hi Experts,
    I am facing some problem with tftp-server in Redhat linux
    Actually we used this tftp server for IOS image coping in to routers
    the problem is
    actually we installed tftp-server-0.40-1 package on my Redhat linux
    server
    and edited /etc/xinetd.d/tftp as below

    service tftp
    {
    socket_type = dgram
    protocol = udp
    wait = yes
    user = root
    server = /usr/sbin/in.tftpd
    server_args = -u root -c -U 111 -s /tftp/
    disable = no
    per_source = 11
    cps = 100 2
    flags = IPv4
    }

    so our tftp server uses /tftp/ as default/public folder for our TFTP
    server
    and we kept our images in that /tfpt server and started the xinetd
    service
    then i loged in to router and when we started copying the image middle
    its stoping the coping

    R7348-PRE4#copy tftp: disk0:
    Address or name of remote host []? 73.48.0.1
    Source filename []? /tftp/images/test
    Destination filename [test]?
    Accessing tftp://73.48.0.1//tftp/images/test...
    Loading /tftp/images/test from 73.48.0.1 (via
    FastEthernet0/0/0): !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...
    [timed out]

    %Error reading tftp://73.48.0.1//tftp/images/test (Timed out)

    This is the problem we are facing
    actually i tried for different images
    the files/images which are less than 32MB is coping properly with out
    any problem
    the files/images which are more than 32MB are not able to copy and
    giving timed out error
    so i did some googling and found that some older version TFTP servers
    will not support with a file size more than 32MB

    "The original protocol has a file size limit of 32 MB,
    although this was extended when RFC 2347 introduced option
    negotiation,
    which was used in RFC 2348 to introduce block-size negotiation in
    1998
    (allowing a maximum of 4 GB and potentially higher throughput).
    If the server and client support block number wraparound, file size is
    essentially unlimited."

    but what the software we use, it will support up to 192MB
    here we got strucked

    here my question is.. Is there any file to see what is the tftp limit
    in my server
    or can any one give a solution for this one how to copy files which
    are more then 32MB?

    Thanks in advance
    Surendra

  2. Re: Tftp server problem

    On Thursday 26 June 2008 16:41, someone who identifies as *bulli* wrote
    in /alt.os.linux.mandrake:/

    > hi Experts,
    > I am facing some problem with tftp-server in Redhat linux
    > Actually we used this tftp server for IOS image coping in to routers
    > the problem is actually we installed tftp-server-0.40-1 package on my
    > Redhat linux server and edited /etc/xinetd.d/tftp as below
    >
    > [...]
    > %Error reading tftp://73.48.0.1//tftp/images/test (Timed out)
    >
    > This is the problem we are facing
    > actually i tried for different images
    > the files/images which are less than 32MB is coping properly with out
    > any problem
    > the files/images which are more than 32MB are not able to copy and
    > giving timed out error
    > so i did some googling and found that some older version TFTP servers
    > will not support with a file size more than 32MB
    >
    > "The original protocol has a file size limit of 32 MB,
    > although this was extended when RFC 2347 introduced option
    > negotiation, which was used in RFC 2348 to introduce block-size
    > negotiation in 1998 (allowing a maximum of 4 GB and potentially higher
    > throughput).
    > If the server and client support block number wraparound, file size is
    > essentially unlimited."
    > [...]


    You are asking a question about RedHat Linux in a Mandrake/Mandriva
    newsgroup...

    Considering that RedHat is quite conservative with regard to certain
    software - and certainly far more conservative than Mandrake/Mandriva - I
    believe it to be not unlikely that the 32 MB filesize limit still applies
    in your version of RedHat.

    Just my two Eurocents worth, of course. I have no experience whatsoever
    with /tftp/ and this is after all a Mandrake/Mandriva group. This
    newsgroup basically only still exists for the sake of those people whose
    newsfeed doesn't carry the Mandriva group yet. (As you may or may not
    know, MandrakeSoft has merged with Conectiva and the newly resulting
    company is thus now called Mandriva.)

    In addition, I would like to point out that you'd have more chances of
    getting a helpful reply if you were to use a real newsreader instead of
    Google Groups. This is after all Usenet, not a forum on Google Groups.

    Google archives Usenet and offers a (badly broken) way to post to Usenet via
    their Google Groups website. They also fail to mention that they do not
    own or run Usenet, leaving their users clueless.

    Usenet has already existed from back at a time long before the internet was
    even still called DARPAnet and back then it ran off of BBS machines.
    Usenet comprises of many, many, many individual servers who are all more or
    less in sync with eachother, and of which some may carry newsgroups which
    do not exist on others.

    Many ISPs offer Usenet access via a mirror of their own, or via outsourcing
    to specialized news services. However, due to the great number of trolls,
    spammer and paedophiles, most US-based ISPs are dropping support for
    Usenet, or at the very least for the binary newsgroups where such offending
    pictures may be found. Still there are free newsservers or newsservers one
    can subscribe to for a small fee.

    As a result of the general cluelessness from Google Groups users, as well as
    the fact that most Usenet spam originates from Google Groups, many regulars
    on Usenet simply block all posts made from Google Groups from getting
    through their newsfeed, and some newsservers even block Google Groups posts
    alltogether.

    As such, subscribing to a real newsserver and using a real newsreader - for
    UNIX-like systems, there are Mozilla Thunderbird, KMail, Evolution, Gnus,
    slrn, Pan and many others - you would stand a far better chance at getting
    a usable reply from someone more knowledgeable about /tftp/ or RedHat than
    myself.

    And by the same token - and with all due respect - you would probably then
    also not be so clueless as to post a RedHat-related question to a Mandriva
    newsgroup. ;-)

    Hope this was helpful. Please heed my advice; I guarantee that you won't
    regret it. ;-)

    --
    *Aragorn*
    (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

  3. Re: Tftp server problem

    On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.os.linux.mandrake, in article
    , Aragorn wrote:

    >On Thursday 26 June 2008 16:41, someone who identifies as *bulli* wrote
    >in /alt.os.linux.mandrake:/
    >
    >> hi Experts,
    >> I am facing some problem with tftp-server in Redhat linux


    >You are asking a question about RedHat Linux in a Mandrake/Mandriva
    >newsgroup...


    Actually, the clueless idiot also posted the same crap to

    alt.comp.linux
    alt.os.linux
    alt.os.linux.suse
    comp.mail.sendmail
    comp.os.linux.hardware
    comp.os.linux.misc
    comp.os.linux.networking
    comp.os.linux.x
    comp.unix.admin
    linux.redhat
    uk.comp.os.linux

    and maybe more - the posts originated at groups.google.com, and I (like
    many others) filter off such posts just because of spam like this. It
    looks like the typical drive-by spam run. Fix your news filter.

    Old guy

  4. Re: Tftp server problem

    On Saturday 28 June 2008 03:38, someone who identifies as *Moe Trin* wrote
    in /alt.os.linux.mandrake:/

    > On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.os.linux.mandrake, in
    > article , Aragorn wrote:
    >
    >>On Thursday 26 June 2008 16:41, someone who identifies as *bulli* wrote
    >>in /alt.os.linux.mandrake:/
    >>
    >>> hi Experts,
    >>> I am facing some problem with tftp-server in Redhat linux

    >
    >>You are asking a question about RedHat Linux in a Mandrake/Mandriva
    >>newsgroup...

    >
    > Actually, the clueless idiot also posted the same crap to
    >
    > alt.comp.linux
    > alt.os.linux


    /Could/ be considered fairly on-topic in the above two groups...

    > alt.os.linux.suse
    > comp.mail.sendmail
    > comp.os.linux.hardware


    Yep, I'm in the latter one too and I've noticed... Yet another group where
    his question is off-topic. ;-)

    > comp.os.linux.misc
    > comp.os.linux.networking
    > comp.os.linux.x
    > comp.unix.admin
    > linux.redhat


    Now *that* last one might actually yield him an answer. :-)

    > uk.comp.os.linux
    >
    > and maybe more - the posts originated at groups.google.com, and I (like
    > many others) filter off such posts just because of spam like this. It
    > looks like the typical drive-by spam run.


    I don't consider this to be spam, though. Spam is advertising, and the guy
    was asking a technical question about a particular and undefined versino
    of /tftp/ in a particular and undefined version of RedHat.

    I believe that his question deserves an answer, but in and from the proper
    newsgroup, not in any off-topic groups. So it's rather a matter of plain
    stupidity - which makes me wonder how he ever got to know GNU/Linux in the
    first place, let alone install it - rather than of spamming.

    > Fix your news filter.


    I'm seriously beginning to ponder the idea... I've tried being polite
    with this guy, but given your report on the multiposting, the level of his
    stupidity seems beyond any remedy... ;-)

    This is probably one of those guys who always buys shoes without laces so he
    wouldn't have to tie them in the morning (by lack of understanding how to
    make a knot, of course!)...

    --
    *Aragorn*
    (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

  5. Re: Tftp server problem

    On Sat, 28 Jun 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.os.linux.mandrake, in article
    , Aragorn wrote:

    >*Moe Trin* wrote


    >> alt.os.linux.suse
    >> comp.mail.sendmail
    >> comp.os.linux.hardware

    >
    >Yep, I'm in the latter one too and I've noticed... Yet another group
    >where his question is off-topic. ;-)


    Someone in the comp.mail.sendmail suggested installing the latest
    version of sendmail, so that the O/P could mail the question to Red
    Hat - which I thought was a very polite way of telling the O/P to...

    >> and maybe more - the posts originated at groups.google.com, and I
    >> (like many others) filter off such posts just because of spam like
    >> this. It looks like the typical drive-by spam run.

    >
    >I don't consider this to be spam, though. Spam is advertising, and
    >the guy was asking a technical question about a particular and
    >undefined versino of /tftp/ in a particular and undefined version of
    >RedHat.


    Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.bulletins,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet,
    news.admin.net-abuse.sightings,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,news.answers
    Subject: FAQ: Current Usenet spam thresholds and guidelines

    That used to be posted every Sunday, but I haven't seen it posted since
    the end of 2007. Quoting from it:

    This article is intended to describe the current consensus spam
    thresholds and ensure that the definitions of these terms are
    available and consistent. It is believed that most, if not all,
    spam cancellers use these terms and definitions in their work;
    however, many other people use the terms inappropriately, which
    leads to confusion in discussions. This is an informal FAQ aimed
    at clarity and understanding, not anal-retentive correctness.

    Excessive Multi-Posting (EMP) has the same meaning as the term
    "spam" usually carries, but it is more accurate and self-explanatory.
    EMP means, essentially, "too many separate copies of a substantively
    identical article."

    "Substantively identical" means that the material in each article is
    sufficiently similar to construe the same message.

    >I believe that his question deserves an answer


    He's certainly gotten those - including a few that _probably_ are the
    technical answer needed.

    >> Fix your news filter.

    >
    >I'm seriously beginning to ponder the idea...


    While this id10t was posting from groups.google.com (which implies a
    poor signal-to-noise situation already), it's probably going to get
    worse given the recent news of several major US ISPs either dropping
    Usenet entirely, or merely dropping the 'alt.*' hierarchy.

    [compton ~]$ sepdate
    Sat Sep 5415 11:27:57 MST 1993
    [compton ~]$

    Either way, filtering is desirable.

    Old guy

+ Reply to Thread